What the Law and the Bible say about Homosexuality.

[glorydaz]

ok, Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

but wait, you don't want to do that do you?



Paul sez to put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Glory sez not to


what to do, what to do :dizzy:

Try reading the verses in context. Maybe you'll understand what Paul is saying.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Then you have Paul contradicting himself, don't you?

Contradicting? Where?

All who sin are deserving of death. Period.

Duh.

But Paul isn't talking about "sin in general," though, is he. He's talking about homosexuality being a crime, and one worthy of death at that.

Romans is the greatest treatise on law ever written. The entire book is about, you guessed it, the law.

 

[Lon]

Perhaps not, but how often does she have to bring up this strawman?

Well, that final letter. "Oh my Good grief" may not be assumed. I just try to avoid it lest one accuses me of blasphemy/taking His Name in vain. :e4e:

 

[glorydaz]

"For she loved much..."

Precious little of that going on with those who want to enact certain laws on here.

Too little. I do see a lot of vengeance, though.

Once man begins to put himself in the place of God we see this kind of vigilante justice.

 

[ok doser]

"For she loved much..."

Precious little of that going on with those who want to enact certain laws on here.

i love my kids, the kids i taught, all the kids in my extended family

and i'm disgusted that perverts like you have been allowed to teach them that perversion is "normal"



btw artie, still waiting for you to share your "love" and "compassion" for rapists and child molesters

 

[ok doser]

What I find interesting is that the Apostle Paul tells those in the church not to judge those outside the church. It simply is not their business.

1 Cor. 5:12-13 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.​

The job of believers is to preach the Gospel of Salvation to the lost. I honestly don't see much of that going on here. :think:

We don't see Jesus calling for the stoning of this harlot, do we?

Luke 7:36-39 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. 37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, 38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. 39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.​

The Pharisee was too busy judging to wash the Lord's feet.

Luke 7:44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. 45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet. 46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. 47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.​

can you show me where in that passage she was demanding that Christ accept her harlotry as "normal"?

 

[glorydaz]

Contradicting? Where?



Duh.

But Paul isn't talking about "sin in general," though, is he. He's talking about homosexuality being a crime, and one worthy of death at that.

Romans is the greatest treatise on law ever written. The entire book is about, you guessed it, the law.

LOL It is not about the law of Moses is it? Paul is quite clear that the government is responsible for protecting the citizens. You're the one trying to mix the spiritual with the physical. You're simply promoting hate instead of preaching the Gospel....which, by the way, is our job.

 

[glorydaz]

can you show me where in that passage she was demanding that Christ accept her harlotry as "normal"?

Paul never says we must accept the ways of the world as "normal". Nor did I say that.

 

[JudgeRightly]

LOL It is not about the law of Moses is it?

You're the one saying "Law of Moses," not me.

I said "law."

Paul is quite clear that the government is responsible for protecting the citizens.

That includes from murderers, homos, rapists, and pedophiles.

You're the one trying to mix the spiritual with the physical.

Well, no, I'm not.

You're simply promoting hate

In order to share the gospel effectively, you need to show people their need for said gospel.

Best way to do that is to use, drumroll please....

A tutor.

What's a good tutor to bring someone to Christ?

You guessed it!

The Law.

instead of preaching the Gospel....which, by the way, is our job.

Instead of?

Rather, I use the law to show people their need for Christ.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Of course there is.

Like what?

Well, no, I can't, because no matter where I go (and I go to a lot of places) I can't seem to get away from a society that is obsessed with perversion.

Then go to fewer places then or get used to the fact that most people aren't zealots and deal with it.

Not what I asked.

I asked if you recognize Paul's authority, and I'll now add to the question:

Do you recognize Paul's authority in matters concerning gentiles?

As before, I don't focus on Paul in the Bible and nor do I think his writings are ones that were remotely applicable to the present. You seem to, I don't. Is it also good for men not to marry et al?

So, in other words, you think that what Paul taught had an expiration date?

What Paul taught was for a specific people of the time, not modern societies so do the math.

もちろんです。 Do you think that everything Paul wrote in his Epistles only applies to the people he wrote to? Or is some of it applicable today?

It was directed to people of the time, they weren't finished with a postscript of "Still pertinent to modern suburbs of America in 2013"...

It won't if no one is trying to get to that point.

I'm currently dealing with part of the problem.

There is no problem. Deal with it.

 

[ok doser]

There is no problem. Deal with it.

:darwinsm:

:thumb:


epic!

 

[glorydaz]

You're the one saying "Law of Moses," not me.

I said "law."



That includes from murderers, homos, rapists, and pedophiles.



Well, no, I'm not.



In order to share the gospel effectively, you need to show people their need for said gospel.

Best way to do that is to use, drumroll please....

A tutor.

What's a good tutor to bring someone to Christ?

You guessed it!

The Law.



Instead of?

Rather, I use the law to show people their need for Christ.

No, you go far beyond that. You are not using the law to show men their guilt so you can lead them to Christ.


You are calling for the law to condemn people to physical death. That is NOT your place. In fact, it is contrary to being an ambassador for Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.​

Ask [MENTION=12870]steko[/MENTION] if he preaches the Gospel to those in prison or if he demands they be put to death for their crimes.

 

[ok doser]

No, you go far beyond that. You are not using the law to show men their guilt so you can lead them to Christ.


You are calling for the law to condemn people to physical death. That is NOT your place. In fact, it is contrary to being an ambassador for Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.​

Ask [MENTION=12870]steko[/MENTION] if he preaches the Gospel to those in prison or if he demands they be put to death for their crimes.

As a Christian, do you believe that civil law should punish criminals?

Do you believe that there should be any civil law?

if yes, do you believe that Christians should have any say on how that law should be formulated?

or do you believe that Christians should remove themselves from that process and allow the formulation of civil law to be left in the hands of wicked men?

 

[JudgeRightly]

No, you go far beyond that. You are not using the law to show men their guilt so you can lead them to Christ.

Sure I do.

I did so a few days ago, and they recognized their need for a savior, and asked God to forgive them, praise God.

Guess what I used.

The law.

Do not bear false witness.
Do not commit adultery.
Do not steal.
Do not blaspheme.

You are calling for the law to condemn people to physical death.

Yup. Because that's what the law does. It kills.

But the Spirit gives life.

That's why the law is a tutor.

If one does not use the law lawfully, one cannot bring anyone to Christ, or, at the very least, their efforts will be largely ineffective.

That is NOT your place. In fact, it is contrary to being an ambassador for Christ.

Sure it is:

Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. - Romans 3:31 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans3:31&version=NKJV

2 Corinthians 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.​

How does my position in any way oppose this verse?

Ask [MENTION=12870]steko[/MENTION] if he preaches the Gospel to those in prison or if he demands they be put to death for their crimes.

Why do you assume that "preach to those in prison" and "capital criminals should be put to death" are mutually exclusive?

Prisons aren't a Godly form of punishment. Restitution, corporal punishment, and the death penalty are.

 

[Idolater]

the doctor who performs the abortion knows that it is murder

and the mother who seeks the death of her child knows that it is murder, in her heart

And you know that these comments, however true they might be, are unsubstantiated. We also know that opinions about abortion and murder divide pretty clearly down religious lines, where certain religious views see it as grave sin (unjustified homicide), and others do not see it that way.

Murdering a person who's already been born is not in dispute anywhere, everybody confesses that's murder, even the murderers. This isn't the case with abortion, not with the abortion physicians, and not with the mothers either. This isn't parallel to LGBTQI+ conjugal behaviors.

and the pervert who seeks societal approval of his perversion, knows in his heart that he is a pervert

That again is an unsubstantiated comment coming from a particular religious viewpoint.

From my own viewpoint, theologically Catholic, I see those engaging in and approving such things as blinded, through being tricked, and through protest against God and His authentic words, which includes both LGBTQI+ conjugal relations and 'on demand' abortion when the mother is under no felt threat from her pregnancy, as gravest sin.

 

[Idolater]

Not true. See here by example and here specifically. These were at one time against the law.

Because of infringement of the right that we all inalienably possess to religious liberty, where police /government cannot justly harass, penalize, or imprison us just because we might not share the religious views of our fellow citizens.

What is to stop 'murder' laws from being abolished? Your 'sentiment' alone? That IS what retracted these laws. I'm asking what one believes would stop 'murder' from being wrong, if the whole country just 'doesn't care anymore' as long as it isn't them.

idk. What would stop us from just suspending all laws and all law enforcement indefinitely if the whole country felt the same way about it? But then keep thinking it through Lon. This is what libertarians do all day long, asking what would we do with zero laws. The answer is that we would re-invent the wheel and make new laws and authorize police to enforce laws, just like we have now, and always have had largely.

The hypothetical where everybody thinks that outlawing murder is a mistake, is never going to happen, ever. Murder will always be illicit. This isn't about murder, and your position is a thinly veiled slippery slope fallacy. Recognizing, affirming, and protecting our respective right to the pursuit of happiness, will Not lead to murder being legal, not in a million years.

Won't happen? I'm saying that is wrong, it is happening.

It's not. False. And it never will. With the exception of if we ever drop the ball on recognizing, affirming, and protecting our religious liberty, because murdering people for disobeying God is actually something that people do practice today, and some who participate on TOL also advocate for murdering people for disobeying God. So if we can keep tabs on that, then no, murder will not some day become legal.

Our laws ARE changing because we cannot keep up with the offenders. All it will take is that the 'majority' stop observing said laws or caring about them, if all we are is animals forced to the lowest commonality. My state (and others) are already defying federal law concerning marijuana usage, so much so, it is now being sold in certain pharmacies as a viable drug for maladies.

The relation between 'marijuana' and either murder or LGBTQI+ conjugal behaviors escapes me. :idunno:

The UN tries to intervene wherever their is injustice specifically 'by right of a higher call.' These heinous acts are 'inhumane' meaning we are different than the animals that do the same. I believe Jacob's OP is addressing 'why' "human" is more than just a consensus of our lowest common agreements of what we can and cannot do. I 'can' practice sexuality but that doesn't mean I should, even if consensual.

Of course not. No argument.

For me? More so, because I believe beings are spiritual, for a spiritual purpose, and not used for animalistic concerns.

That's fine. That's a religious view that is not shared by all your fellow citizens, and they all possess the same inalienable right to their own religious views as you do yours.

 

[glorydaz]

Contradicting? Where?



Duh.

But Paul isn't talking about "sin in general," though, is he. He's talking about homosexuality being a crime, and one worthy of death at that.

Romans is the greatest treatise on law ever written. The entire book is about, you guessed it, the law.

Paul was indeed speaking of sin in general.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;​

Paul is speaking of the entire downward spiral of a society that rejects God.

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,​

And includes: "fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things"...not just homosexuality.


You're the one who picked homosexuality out of the mix as if the rest was not there. This is cherry picking with an obvious attempt to deceive. You've made the same pronouncement multiple times, and clearly twisted this text to death.

We see Paul speaking of worshipping idols, and the "lusts of their own hearts"....NOT JUST HOMOSEXUALITY.

Romans 1:23-25 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.​

Is it your claim that this entire text is talking about homosexuals? Seriously? :AMR:

Romans 1:26-32 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.​

 

[glorydaz]

If one does not use the law lawfully, one cannot bring anyone to Christ, or, at the very least, their efforts will be largely ineffective.

To preach the Gospel....not to stone them to death.

You understand the difference?

How does my position in any way oppose this verse?

Are you claiming stoning people is being an ambassador for Christ?

Do you not see the difference?

Prisons aren't a Godly form of punishment. Restitution, corporal punishment, and the death penalty are.

You are not in charge of punishments, however. No matter how badly you'd like to be.

Ambassadors for Christ. Get it?

 

[glorydaz]

As a Christian, do you believe that civil law should punish criminals?

I have said as much many times, and you know it.

Do you believe that there should be any civil law?

Asked and answered.

if yes, do you believe that Christians should have any say on how that law should be formulated?

They have and they do.

or do you believe that Christians should remove themselves from that process and allow the formulation of civil law to be left in the hands of wicked men?

In this country we have a vote, but wicked men are still in charge. So what's your point?

I would not want people like you and JR making any of the sentencing guidelines, however.

 

[glorydaz]

You are calling for the law to condemn people to physical death.

Yup. Because that's what the law does. It kills.

No, the law was given to show men their sin.
It was given to lead men to faith in Jesus Christ.



You're confusing the civil law with the law of God.


You would like to force the Law of Moses on people today. You want that so badly, you're blurring the boundaries that God has set forth between the laws of men and the laws of God.